[Serious Discussion] Religion

[Maddolis]

Egypt for example. It's already chaotic, isn't it?! It could've even went farther, the only excuse keeping people away from more destruction is actually their religion.

Their religion drives much of the violence.
-Name one moral or ethical action or behavior committed or carried out by a believer that could not have been committed or carried out by an atheist.
-Name one immoral or unethical action or behavior that has been committed or carried out in the name of God.

I have deep knowledge of the religion, I just don't practice the religion itself, such as praying, reading Quraan etc. And anyone can disagree!

Perhaps Mohammed killed apostates, but as you should know, it's nothing compared to what happened to him, or Islam at that time. Also, as you join Islam, it's your own responsibility to agree on what's told to you.

That's also immoral. Killing someone for ceasing to believe in something is incredibly immoral, no matter what evil surrounds you contextually. A rapist or murderer in Germany in the early 1940s would still be evil and deserve punishment, no matter how much worse the SS or certain Nazi leaders may have been.
Secondly, it shouldn't be one's responsibility to agree with anything without researching the issue, thinking about it and searching for any inherent truth. In the developing, scientifically literate world, people are presented with ideas and suitable evidence explaining why the hypothesis was made, not "believe that E=mc^2 or you'll burn in an eternal hellfire." Every person has a right to question or test scientific discoveries- in fact it's encouraged. And if you decide to turn your back on the knowledge- even something as overwhelmingly supported such as Evolution, you are not condemned to death- people just let you be. Those are real morals.

Sorry, I've misunderstood the meaning of the word itself in the first place. Also as I mentioned above, it's your own responsibility to agree to what's told to you once you join. Some replies I expect: "I'm born a Muslim, I don't get the chance to agree or disagree upon the rules." I believe those who are born Muslims and want to be Atheists, or whatever, can abandon the religion with no penalty.

Does that mean that you believe that those who join later in life, and leave, can't abandon the religion without penalty? Can't give up unsubstantiated belief and cannot change simply the way they think without being punished?

I need to! For a long time that belief actually kept me away from a LOT of bad things that I could've done, which of course would've had caused bad consequences to my health, or life.

I think you're giving yourself too little credit. Not to call you weak in personality as I don't know you well enough, but I'm sure you could turn away from whatever other temptations (good or bad) without the need to believe in a deity.

At this age, you can take some parts and leave some parts actually. I guess you know why, because of what Mohammed said, that the farther the age, the less religion is practiced by its own people which is totally normal.

How is it that you know what parts to leave? I'm assuming if you had a friend who joined the Muslim faith and left promptly, you wouldn't kill them- even though your faith gives you every right (within the faith, not the law depending on where you live) to do so? The reason you're dropping this part from your belief system is through secular values. It's similar to the same old stale argument: "If you don't believe in God, where do you get your morals?," to which the response is "where do you get yours? The bible?/qu'ran?/... do you follow them precisely? Do you kill apostates or disrespect women and persocute homosexuals?"
"No, you're obviously not meant to follow those parts."
It's obvious due to a development of secular moral standards, some of which have been developed through evolution and natural selection, others which have been developed and encouraged through secular society.

And eventually nothing in the entire universe is accepted by all people. Everything must have advocates and adversaries.

Sure, but child rape, beastiality and murder also have their advocates and adversaries yet it doesn't legitimize either side. The arguments worth having are those where both sides have strong evidence supporting their views.